##VIDEO ID:HbWVdbrZtwg## Mr. Stembridge but Mr. Landsea represents Mr. President as well as Mr. Collins president is Mr. Stembridge.  Thank you, Madam Chair. Before we start the hearing scheduled for 11 a.m., I will ask if there are any requests for drawls or deferrals from the time from just a reminder again that we are a six member board that Mr. Arancini, are you speaking before?  Yes, I am sure. OK, can you let us know what address is the bottom of page five the first hearing for 11 a.m. four hundred four hundred and eight W by the way so that would be the case. VOA one six two five four zero with the address of one hundred thirty 108 eight West Broadway . Would you explain to your yes. Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Good morning Madam Chairman. Members of the board. My name is George Arancini.  I'm an attorney with the business of 350 W5 Whitesell Austins Madam Chairman members I'm biased. It was an advertising issue with this matter. It has been really advertised and we based that the new hearing date January 20 was OK with that may I have a motion motion to refer this case until September 24 December?  Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes, Mr. yes we are. >> Yes.  Mr. Collins. Yes, Chairman Chairmanships motion carries thank you Mr. Stembridge two seventy five street please. So that is a very one six three zero three one nine with the address of two seventy five whole streets. When you go ahead and explain with yes. Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Madam Chair, members of the board and attorney Ryan Spitz Adamson Morante Business Founders one sixty eight Street Street South Boston. We are in the room today to Peter OK kind of things.  Yeah so just to clarify it would just be a not administrative crowd so the deferral and the first one we had would be October eight that would be Deleware.  Thank you very much. Motion motion totally totally different with a second Mr. Stembridge, right? Yeah. Here.  Yes, Mr. yes.  As we were yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Chair votes yes motion carried you see you then you won.  We all know withdrawals and deferrals will return to the hearing scheduled for 11:00 a.m. press.  We have a case underway one six three seven three seven five with the address three thirty six Meridian Street if you have to come down the present what the experts.  Yes. Good morning Mr. Stembridge madam Chair, members of the board Richard lands with a business address of two forty five Sumner Street Response on behalf obsession George Rodriguez We probably get started on this third slide here just by way of a quick overview this project involves the change of occupancy for a preexisting series of rowhouses brewhouse. We're looking at three thirty six morning street.  A number of these proposals have been before the board previously and have received relief under the CyrusOne provisions of Article 53 with the amendments Article fifty three. This is now the number for District and the relief that is being requested is absolutely minimal.  If we want to jump down to the I think the sliding would be the survey we so with respect to the proposal by the chair of the board this change the occupancy for the three existing units the forty units in modifies the weirdy that exist presently on the building to close those to add additional gross floor area.  The violations were serious setback and insufficient on-street parking. This is under the new zoning amendments so a number of the other violates typically appear to have been eliminated as you can see from the survey are currently to the Dax's eight point forty. We propose no additional increase in that set by anything. We just enclose what's there because of the reconstruction of those attacks that are nonconforming, we are required to seek relief for the rear guard.  However, nothing with respect to the footprint changes with respect to street parking as board sports aware this site does not allow for access to any of the area of the land even if it were available in order to create a occurred we would be required to take away On-street parking which is certainly frowned upon and public works so the relief is relatively minimal. I can jump down to the floor plans slightly above and just so we can see what the renovation would look like this building does have some basement as well as in lower level. We'll see that in the elevation the moment the scope of work really just deals with that lower level plan that we see here in the middle of the screen allowing for a full residential unit at that level as indicated, this is not unlike the adjoining buildings along us walk where we've made similar renovations and changes of occupancy.  If we can jump down to perhaps slide 13 that will show the elevations the left side we do see that this is a three storey building. Somebody in St. We don't make any change with respect to that facade. You do see the rear elevation on the right side with that enclosed condition where those existing Garside we are also proposing a roof deck Madam Chair and because this is considered a three storey building from the routine street, the access is permitted. I would also point out that under amended Article 53 roof decks are deemed compliant provided they meet with the specifications for roof ex.  At this point I will pause for any questions the board but as you can see the relief is relatively straightforward.  Thank you. Are there questions from the board hearing public testimony and money? Madam Chairman, members of the board my name is of a Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding the thirty six My Main Street our office will defer to the board's judgment on this matter.  Committee process was conducted including in a meeting on July 30th of this year which was not attended by any constituent.  Additionally, the proposal was reviewed by the Global Civic Association which voted twelve in favor and to oppose and provided a letter of support at this time in the mayor's office the neighborhood services the bridge to the board's decision. Thank you for your time consideration. Thank you Mr Good morning. I'm sure most of the Boy Scouts are far from concerned post office and the council would like to volunteer for this project based on its alignment with poneys and the extension of the park for the union. Thank you.  I have no numerous questions from the board here.  None a motion I'll make a motion to approve PPTA design review in Boston last summer to review.  Yeah I didn't share. May I ask what the Scherbatsky I think he's looking at the next case. Are you sorry I looking at the wrong one is its approval approvals are OK now the second ok Mr. Collins could you repeat your motion. Yes I'll make a motion to approve thank you. OK Mr. Stembridge.  Yes Mr. Garcia. Yes Mr. Langham.  Yes as we will yes.  Mr. Collins. Yes chair votes yes. The motion carries thank you.  Next we have three compelling cases being case VOA one six seven seven to eight the address through thirty to forty Maverick Street. Along with that we have a case VOA one six two seven zero zero also with the address of two thirty to forty Bedford Street. It's the and all of the representative of the police people in the case of Boy yes.  Thank you again Mr. Stanbridge. Madam Chairman, members of the board Richard Land this business owners of two forty five Sumner Street Response we have a petition about Wessells please start with slide two. This is a preexisting three unit dwelling located in the Jefferys Point neighborhood.  These on the corner of cottaging I'm sorry the market place of marriage. Why would we jump to the next slide? I could see a better view of the street down a slide three please can see the existing conditions as the board will note this property was originally a retail store at the lower level residential units above part of the request involves the confirmation of occupancy of the units but of course the change of occupancy to forty units this was up to the next slide. This was submitted under the fire provisions of Article fifty three and as you can see the building itself is a pre existing nonconforming structure being a coralline condition there are minimal setbacks that have been in existence since this building was built near the next slide please.  Another view and this actually provides a little bit of context for what's immediately adjacent to it. I'm sorry this it is Cottage Street. I can see that we do have a four story building behind it with the changes to the or the amendments article fifty three this building is now in the sport district so a number of the violations that we're excited and that's indicated in the public notice for this project have been either a little bit or would be eliminated under current zoning with the exception of parking which to the next slide please . As you can see here, as I indicated, this is an event for District Mexi and we'll stop here for a moment just to run through some of the zoning matters that are involved. So with respect to the issues that are before the board that our side of the public notice multiphase use was cited. It's forbidden. However, in the Ebbsfleet District a multifamily use is now permitted with respect to the dimensional matters that are involved excessive FDR was also cited within the before under the amendments Article 33 there is no longer a maximum FBAR so that no longer would be applicable.  We also are cited for insufficient light area and insufficient usable open space. Those two are also eliminated in the minutes article fifty three and therefore no longer be violations.  We were also cited for excessive height in stories.  The changes in Article fifty three now allow for export story building in this district and they also allow the fifteen hour building as proposed at a maximum of forty feet there jump to the next slide.  Give us a different perspective on the rendering look perfect with respect to the remaining dimensional violations that were cited under Article fifty three that includes Cydia regarding Frontyard and that specifically deals with the addition which we would have been silent under the prior versions of Article 53 Article fifty three thirty allowed now allows for vertical editions to continue to the maximum height limit provided that they do not exceed the existing footprint for which they set. So essentially as long as you're not making any of those nonconformity getting worse you can go out vertically for the existing building in East Austin provided that you stay within the higher limit. That's exactly what we've proposed here. We also received street parking as mentioned in the previous presentation, this site would not be able to accommodate any new parking meters were it would not be transportable and DTD and public works actually discourage creating problems. Parking lot it's only for one vehicle so we are requesting a variance for that in terms of the next slide please just another view here of East Side View on Canal Street. >> Next slide please.  I'm going to probably jump to more slides three more sorry.  Next one please. Yeah this is a good one.  So you can see here we maintain the existing footprint.  There are some additional combos that are being added.  The two that are on Collins Street within the property boundary there's an existing umbrella that is already at the corner of Maverick and Cottage . The bailouts do not violate the foundation or Siderov requirements as they are permitted extensions under the zoning code certainly under the dimensional regulations of Article fifty three that allow for what we consider a windows next slide please just have floor layouts.  We essentially are not changing anything with respect to the lower levels. There is some reprograming of the space if we want to jump down on the next slide just look at one level that is probably the only one that's really relevant at this point. Next slide please is the fourth level here one of things that we do also that is a proposed roof that we have a companion case for building code relief as this would be a four story building we are proposing consistent with broadcast practice the community's preference to not incorporate the head house for Mustafa and therefore requesting the appropriate building currently from the board with respect to access by Hatch. And last but not least this is it within the we have provided the Boston Water approval along with the no harm letter I to deposit this answer any questions. Thank you.  Are there questions from the board hearing none of the testimony.  Good morning Madam Chairman of the board. My name is David Jones representing the mayor's office Neighborhood Services regarding two thirty eight to two party Maverick Street our office will defer to the board's judgment on this matter. The committee process was conducted including in a Buttars meeting held on two fifteen twenty four this year which was slightly attended by constituents the city heard the proposal did also meet with the Civic Association which was called Street Civic Association and they voted eight in support and three opposed to the proposal. They did provide a letter which they requested planning department review to ensure cohesion among the design of the whole property.  At this time our office would like to defer to the management the board thank you very much so that Christian good morning by the chairman of the board about half from his office at this time the council won't support either because of its compliance with police force and to accept update on Street. Thank you.  Good morning, Madam Chair. Members of the board Christian similarly and the our trust and we have both the BWC approval and no harm letters from the applicant.  Thank you and have no additional waistbands.  Any other questions from the board?  May I have a motion now I will motion to approve PPTA Design Review and Boston Water and Sewer.  I ask is there a second psychosexually coverage? Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes Mr. Langham.  Yes ma'am. As we well yes.  Mr. Collins. Yes schierholz yes the motion carries good luck. Thank you very much.  Next two cases are deferred so that will take them to case VOA young six year old five nine three three the address of fifty three Forell Street it's d'Alpuget and all the investors are a little present but then please explain to the boy a.m. I just I see Tahlia just to make a panelist on second and you did try to make your panelists mutual in the next room to the self again.  Good morning Madam Chair.  The members of the board my name is Charlie Tivnan.  I'm an attorney with the business address of Fifteen Broadstreet Boston on behalf of the applicant Sean George and Patrick Hadon, owner of the property of fifty three Burrell Street. The proposal is to construct a three family dwelling at fifty three Birrell's Street the zoning district has three family four thousand and the lot size is two thousand five hundred and twenty one square feet.  There are two side by side garages on the existing property which are in disrepair if approved by the board the garage will be replaced by a three family dwelling.  The carpet owners business nearby is Haken Construction and this property if approved by the board would provide the possible additional housing for some of its employees.  And there was a presentation to the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative. There were no objections and I would at this time defer to Sean George who could answer any design related questions. I also did ask the zoning ambassador if you could add a single exhibit which is a Google map photo of the existing condition of the at the property are the questions of the board hearing that meant public testimony.  Madam Chairman of the Board concerning with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services at this time the mayor's office I could defer to the judge in this board has hosted a meeting for this proposal on June 4th. No concerns raised in that meeting was slightly attended by the applicant as you heard from representation went on to meet with the Dudley Square Neighborhood Initiative in July . We're unaware of any concerns at this time without the firm to the board. >> Thank you.  No raised hands at the moment but that may our motion make a motion to approve a second that can Mr. Stembridge the Mr. here? Yes, Mr. Lynham. Yes as well.  Yes, Mr. Collins. Yes. Chairman.  Yes. The motion carries good luck.  Thank you Madam Chair and thank members of the board and thank you to the zoning ambassador next we have a more compelling case of first use case and VOA once six one six three four three. What did one twenty going down the road?  Along with that we have case VOA one six one six three four seven the address of one twenty four going down the road fifty applicants and their representatives was present.  Please inform of the cases that brought yes.  Good morning everyone. My name is chosen General I am Waitaki Design Collaborative and I am representing the owner Olsun Lucene on this project he is the school of the Paleckis. He's intending to subdivide an existing eight thousand five hundred forty eight square feet lot into two separate lots the building to the right is the existing building. Just to go back a little existing building and we are proposing the building on the left that is encircled with the red.  If we can move further down please.  This is a site plan location just showing existing site in context.  Can we go back just a little bit more to the site plan? Thank you.  >> All right. Site plan here in the outline in the existing site and we are proposing to subdivide into two separate lots. I am showing an adjacent property at the rear of our site in yellow. It's really showing the context of some things similar to what we're doing. There are two houses to multi unit houses on a lot very similar to what we have indexable we were intending to do on our property.  Next slide please.  A little closer of the two buildings at the rear of a property just to show the context and to show that something similar to what we're doing will work on Beach Street and go to the next slide.  We need to show a few more context of what exists within the street. We have typically we typically have two and a half stories to three stories with Grace Foundation on that street in Dayboro. So we are proposing something similar to what exists there.  Let's go to the next slide Zoning Valley and it came along with this this further down to a proposed site plan.  Again, the existing building is on the right or the site plan is on the left there and we are proposing to have foolhardiness spaces.  Each unit will have two spaces and we are proposing a curb cut along with that and the violations no that were excessive as they are and the parking lot has a violation in fact providing for parking spaces and the sites and back requirements. We have eight feet the left hand side in twelve feet on the right and we have four front said there could be twenty feet well aligned with the existing buildings in the street. Next slide please.  What floor plan we are proposing a total of three bedrooms per unit two and have bad and open living concepts so the first unit will be on the ground that one first floor and our second unit will be we can move to the next slide will be in the second and third floor again three two bedrooms, three bedrooms per unit.  Next slide please.  The front elevation will composed of the material similar to what exists in the street and in the neighborhood. We are proposing to go up to the height of the building will be thirty three feet six inches and part of the first floor unit will be in the current level unit the basement unit.  Next slide please.  Elevations of different sides of the building and isometric you just to get an idea feel for what we are proposing next slide really rendering to show what exists there on the right and what we are proposing again we are proposing a curb correct. It will have parking at the rear.  So this is what the street view will will look like.  Oh you know, I'm just going to question from the point thank you. Thank you.  Questions from the board and I'm following testimony. Yes, Madam Chair, members of the board are continuing with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services at this time the marriage is defer to the judgment. This board I want us to help sort of bothers me on July 8th there are a number of residents in attendance.  Some have expressed dissatisfaction with what they thought were subpar conditions of the property over the years . There was also some concerns raised regarding the height amassing to the building and concerns about potential traffic issues during the construction process.  The applicant did go on to meet with the West Village Neighborhood Association which I it's the group was somewhat neutral but ultimately ended up supporting the proposal from my understanding. With that I'll defer to the board at this time.  >> Thank you. Thank you.  Have always had concerns.  Can you hear me? Yes, we have beautiful I am at 118 Glendower which is right next to the proposed property and I want to say that I really think the four thousand foot is too small for the proposed family to family house. I I will cite that said back to foundation if the property line goes in between the two proposed things there is a part of the property line and the foundation that there would only be two feet two inches between being a property line and I am one twenty one twenty four and the foundation of one twenty four the the presentation showed that they were going to remove in order to put the driveway between the two properties that they would remove part of the front retaining wall and carved out a driveway leading to the back in the parking but that that driveway would be lower the grade and the level is lower than the one twenty four and again because the foundation is so close to the one twenty four foundation so close to the proposed property line there is no place to put in a retaining wall to accommodate a hold back the property on either side. So that's that's one of the things that I, I would say and when they cited the context of the beach street behind those two houses they are level in in their their level. So that's one of the great concern as well as the fact that there are several of the article sixty three Section nine there are multiple ones for both properties being sought rather than relief for one and then therefore no need for the other. I'm also concerned about the you can you wrap up please?  Yeah, I'm concerned about the impact of the construction and the loss of green space on water runoff drainage retention and groundwater levels.  That's a big concern here because of Stoneybrook.  And lastly, we are a long narrow one way street and I'm not where all the construction equipment will access much less be house. There's no room to go around it. I just the impact on parking et cetera would be that you thank you. It's going the other reasons.  Yes. So please please be brief and new information first. My name is Craig Lafayette one zero Weakland. Our roads are just down the road from this proposed property. I drove a couple of questions or concerns.  One was to cut down this will remove some on-street parking that's already a little bit tight on that road and I know they're adding parking behind the building but it doesn't account for people who already parking those spots who are some of them in property that hasn't been built yet. I also share some concern about the retaining wall and the drainage from the adjoining house does have a French drain foundation which was added during its renovation and appears at the parking or the driveway for the new unit is where that function is. It doesn't look like that was accounted for. At least I can tell and I'm worried at that at that French trailer was removed there be some flooding issues in that house or possibly on the street . It was my main concern just parking and drainage in the area. Thank you. Thank you. And have no additional listings at the moment but the applicant like to respond and can you just confirm the curb situation ,the question about parking? Yes, So we are proposing a cut so that would essentially create four parking spaces at the rear of the building.  But I think the concern is with the current cut they might be a reduction of one parking space to create that.  I think it's a good thing for parking that we are creating parking at the rear of the building, alleviating traffic on the road. So I don't see that as a big concern.  And as far as the front shrink we are in preliminary design there will be opportunities to really look at the site and we rode the fringe train if you want to.  So I think we can overcome some of these issues. Most of those issues that or pointed out here. Thank you.  Are you with the applicant or you and the architect?  The applicant? Yes. OK, other questions on the board.  OK, that is our motion.  I'll make a motion to do with PDA design or do is there a Second Circuit Mr. Stembridge?  Yes, Mr. Unsere.  Yes Mr. Langham. Yes.  Well yes Mr. Collins. Yes Cherbourg's yes. The motion carries a chair and members of the board would go on to read discussion was scheduled for a of dirty money or and we will ask or any withdrawals or deferrals from the start also when Tinkly Street so that is case away one six zero three one six zero with the address of twenty in clickstream would you go ahead and respond so yes. Thank you Mr. Secretary. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Members of the board attorney Jeff Trango with going to scout out for the business address why the Beacon Street? I was brought to our attention yesterday that the plans examiner is requesting an updated plan and sir so we would request a short deferral. We can have that actually we ask that we have completed all community process on October 8th that is filling up. We're going to how does that work for you? Perfect. Thank you.  May I have a motion motion to accelerate now the second I Mr. Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes, Mr. Ryan. Yes. As we well yes. Mr. Collins. Yes, Chairman. Just the motion carries to you then. Thank you.  If there are no more requests for withdrawals or referrals from this time from 190 our street Mr. Secretary.  Yes. So that would be VOA one five eight eight one three three with the address of one of our our which I explained was absolutely. Good morning, Madam Chair. Members of the board is there any medical literature tilting of the business address of one hundred Franklin Street? This case needed to be advertised to add an additional violation for Cejka.  I believe it was already advertised for the October 8th hearing.  So we're seeking a deferral at this time that may have a motion motion to defer now the Second Circuit Mr. Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Violencia. Yes. Mr. Lanham. Yes. Well yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Chairman. Yes. The motion carries you then. Thank you very much.  And this me no other request for of the firm. I will mention that we are six member board of so that's what you can pay.  It will be the only one six zero six nine six three with the address of three conference conference.  Along with that we have case VOA one six zero one seven one five with the address of thirty two Caucus Street. It's continually representing the President. Will they please chance this is Timothy Sheehan. I'm the architect for both projects. I'm thirty and thirty two Crowded Street are attached single families and currently they both have small dog house Dorman's on a concrete streetside thirty has but ten feet wide existing schedule on the back thirty two Congress Street doesn't have just a skylights on the back.  What we'd like to do is run a dormer basically all the way across the front and hold it back two and a half feet two feet two inches from each side so there'd be a shed dormer all the way across the street front side for both projects and on a back for a number thirty we would make the existing chandelier bigger and then our number thirty two there's nothing there we'd like to schedule or so basically all the way across the back and all the way across the front we'd like to do schedule to allow for more space on a bedroom floor based on the bedroom floor. You know you're losing a lot of square footage as you get into the eaves and we'd like to change some do floodplain changes as well as well because Charlestown is the restricted roof district where we are. We need zoning board approval to allow this to happen.  We had a lightly attended community meeting and with that I'll leave it to your questions. Thank the questions from the board here in public testimony, Madam Chair members of the board see also the Office of Neighborhood Services this conditioner's completed the community process our office hosted filibusterers meeting the twenty Fourth of July which no concerns were raised. We are unaware of any other community concerns at this time. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank you him and then tried seeing no raised hand at the moment and motion we share with you with the department their second Mr. Stembridge. Yes. Yes Mr. Landsea.  Yes. Mr. Lyman. Yes we are. Yes Mr. Collins.  Yes Chairman. Just motion good luck. >> Thank you. Home that we have VOA once extreme for a five thirty with the address fifty three to eighty five Canal Street it is applicant and they representative a present.  Please explain the case to the record. Thank you Mr. Secretary.  Thank you Madam Chair. Members of the Board of Jeff Drago with Trego Toscano with a business address of eleven Beacon Street on behalf of the applicant and my client new tradition media and representing them is Sebastian Emara was a representative of the company of the proposal before fifty three dash eighty five Canal Street is a proposal to remove an existing post or structure advertisement board. If we could just stay on this the above slide Madam Basser we actually have some pictures too I think that we submitted if there's other slides at present yeah. If you go all the way to the top I'm not sure where those went but I'll just keep going so it's to remove the existing poster structure on the side of the wall and to replace with a new signboard.  Twenty five by twenty five static rollerskating this new sign would have no structure so currently on the side of the wall and I'm not sure where the present station is. We did submit a full presentation but if we don't have it I'll do the best I can to describe it.  The existing sign has structure. It has catwalk metal structure fixed to it and you can see if we remain on this slide for a minute that the existing if you go back down the master do you know Madam Ambassador, there's actually a presentation we did submit one hour is this this is just plans it would be helpful if we have that one on file but if not I can show here so you can see there is a ladder on the side. There's a metal structure and the sign is actually bigger that's there right now it's twenty four by four by twenty eight. The new sign would not go over the top of the building as the current site does would be smaller at twenty five by twenty five it would remove all of the structure and just be on the side of the building and working with the community. There's actually the existing build for this on the bridge to permanent build wards that are wrapped into one. There's also a permanent billboard on the roof of the building and all of this was shown in what we had submitted. Not sure where it is as part of this proposal would remove the structure on the top of the roof to that dome or that active billboard would come down.  We would only have one applicable sign on the side of the building as opposed to two larger signs grouped into one. The scaling would not go above the parapet of the building as it does now in the news site and all of that metal structure would come down just to point to node and we did have an aerial view of all of this in the presentation this side of the roof is actually visible from the residential building at one canal as part of this proposal. That sign now comes down from the roof.  Those folks where they are pool area and dark areas no longer have to look at that billboard structure.  As we went through the process we were able to get the support of the downtown Business Association as well as the West End Civicus Association because we're removing all of these structures as part opposer which were put out by the old applicants just to reiterate there would be no lighting or illumination this is not a digital billboard in any way. It's just a static sign that's affixed to the building basically what's currently there is the same except this would be smaller and remove all structures.  It lowers the billboard below the roof line and it is a smaller board on site and removes the view of that rooftop billboard that exists.  They are now from the residential buildings. We were sighted as again even though it's basically replacing something it's there it does get cited as a new board and it falls within a Bullfinch Triangle area which is Mixed-Use.  There's a lot of commercial and some residential and that does require a design review, full design review by the PPTA as well. We were saying that's called Small Project Review. I could speak to the PPTA on that.  It's basically the same as what we would call design review which we were cited for as well. I don't know where the presentation that we submitted is if we can't find it I'm happy to answer any questions that the board may have on this matter.  And if Mr. Hampton is Don yeah I'm sorry wrong I so I'm I'm pretty familiar with this billboard money.  My understanding is that they saw the recommendation for Jarnail if we were to deny this my understanding is the existing board would remain and maybe just something from my colleagues to consider as it seems like the proposal is a little bit smaller and scale and maybe improves the existing conditions. But I was just curious about the general recommendation.  So thank you very much for this. We will just have to city of Boston Planning Department if you go over the history billboards in the city that come before the Court of Appeal, we've recommended denial.  That's just our policy in the way that we view them right now. It doesn't matter who owns the building or where it is. We haven't supported new billboards all I understand what this process is and what it brings and it's too bad that there isn't a proposal that would probably better explain it.  But our policy as a city is to recommend denial on billboards . Thank you. Identify me interject this we will in reading the recommendation although it is denial as Mr. Hampton just just explained, it does mention that the structure what actually the new structure would clean up the existing site by removing all of that metal structure. What it does mention is also the removal as part of our agreement of the build board that sits on the top of the roof. And it's a shame because in our presentation we submitted it shows clearly that billboard on the roof which will come down that is incomplete plain sight of the one canal residential building and that was a big factor and getting the support of the two civic associations as well.  And I ask if this case is denied whether we have been with a billboard that is there right now, it would remain the structure would all remain on site.  Any other questions from the board may have public testimony. The monument of ten members on board. My name is David Jones representing the mayor's office and neighborhood services regarding five Canal Street. Our office will defer to the board's judgment on this matter . Community process was conducted including in a budget meeting held on seven eight of this year which was attended by no constituent.  Additionally, the proposal was reviewed with the Western Civic Association which convened on August 1st of this year. The association expressed opposition regarding the proposal and requested to be notified before the post and billboard structures are removed so that they can be photographed by staff at the Western Museum. They did also provide a letter of non opposition at this time the mayor's office and neighborhood services defers to the board's decision.  >> Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you.  Oh I do. Jay won't looking to give testimony here and central request I just made in such an and address and briefly tell us the principal position.  Sure. Thank you. Good morning.  Almost afternoon chairman of the board Jay Walsh on behalf of the Downtown Association we'd like to go on record in support of the application. Mr. O'Mara and his team met with us on numerous occasions. They've been very accommodating and telling us the differences between what they're proposing and what is there now.  Additionally, the removal of the structure, the one canal building is something that has been requested by many within our membership and that's all they've also been very accommodating on lighting issues that exist with the current structure relative to the residential building opposite them on Canal Street and for those reasons we'd like to be recorded in support.  Thank you. OK and I have no additional questions tonight. Thank you. Any other questions from the board with that? May I have a motion?  I'll make a motion to approve.  Is there a second can't Mr. Stembridge?  Yes, Mr. Valencia.  Yes, Mr. Lyon.  No mas as we well yes. Mr. Collins. Yes, The chair votes yes the motion carries thank you very much.  Next we have a case boy one five nine nine eight six zero put the address three thirty to Broadway if the applicant and or their representative is present please explain case to the board.  Yes. Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Madam Chair, members of the board attorney Ryan Spetz with Adam's emergency business out of 168 H Street first floor South Boston I'm here on behalf of my client mavor Hospitality . The proposal in front of us today is seeking to add in alignment attainment license after tendering to its current occupancy.  This restaurant was previously known as shenanigans which was acquired by my client a little bit over a year ago. It appeared to have taken place into my live entertainment after ten thirty pm for that outlook and only the new restaurant is doing business currently as Leyla's the operator has a stellar reputation in this community as well as other parts of the city of Boston operating restaurants take our relief is a forbidding use permit in this sub district . The live entertainment after ten thirty is also a forbidding use in some district but will not be any different than the previous restaurants. Operator the operator is proposing five entertainment seven days a week no more than two acoustics from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and an opportunity to allow a deejay on Thursday nights three Sundays from nine p.m. to twelve a.m. Windows will be closed by 9:00 him with live entertainment occurs also after reading the planning department's recommendation there was a little bit of a discrepancy.  They appear to believe that there was a slight increase in a few seats as far as the occupancy. However, the current occupancy of two hundred and thirty two people remained the same and again that there is a proposed increase in occupancy at this point I'm going to turn it over to the board for any questions or comments. Thank other questions from the board, not public testimony, madam Chair, members of the Board C. Johnson the Office of Neighborhood Services.  This proponent has completed the owners community process. Our office hosted Buderus meeting on June the 3rd at which questions were answered about the proposal. The proponent stated that the request to add live entertainment is consistent with the use of the premises by previous owners. They were concerns raised about noise and noise mitigation in St. Vincent's Neighborhood Association is active civic group in this area and they have declined to take a position on this proposal and have encouraged the owner to continue conversations with neighbors to address the concerns of mitigating noise.  With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank OK.  Good morning madam.  The members of the board are here for office at this time listening to your record support. Thank you for your time.  Thank you. OK and appears we have no additional recent or any other questions on the board.  Yes I have one small question do we really need do we really need light entertainment on a Sunday?  I'm just curious about Sandy. Yes, I mean there is a need for on some some days and again it won't be consistently each each Sunday and then one thing I think it's worth don't take it said you do bring it up but alive at the table. So when the new owners acquired this property they went through extensive interior renovation and they added additional soundproofing barriers to the roof and the actual walls as well. So those neighbors that did show up to me about his meeting that did have those concerns we did meet on site after the about our meeting to show that those changes were actually made. It seemed like they were responsive to it as well. OK, thank you.  Thank you for that motion.  I would like to make a motion a couple of what is there a second that can Mr. Stembridge yes.  Mr. Danciu yes. Mr. yes.  Yes. Mr. Collins. Yes. Chairwoman's yes. The motion carries with you next. We have three more companion cases. The first being case will be away one five six five one zero two with the address of the Greenville Street.  Along with that we have Case Boet one five six five zero nine four with the address of eight are Greensill Street is the Avenue and the representatives are present there twenty six point the thank you very much Mr. Amberg and Chair and members of the board. I am hearing from the applicant for eight hour and eight p.m. exam in front of the board before the mid to late late Ms outstanding funds immediately go and meet with the community which I have brought. My brother is on the right and on my left to support and I also sent a letter of support from the community members themselves. The second line item outstanding was the easement situation in which I find out if I own both properties it's hard to get myself and easement so we were able to get a lawyer and a surveyor to change should the is to eight are Greenville and eight Greenville with the family members divided equally and therefore we were able to get that easement and I sent it over and with that I will leave the board members to have if you have any questions on if you wanted to see the easement we sent sir, do you want to just briefly walk us through it? There may be board members who were not present the last time this was heard. I appreciate it. Thank you.  Yes. So if you go back up to the drawing with the color right there and zoom in here and see that see I'm not sure if proposing a three family row house is behind a Greenville which comes from Greenville following that blue line, those blue lines or the underground utilities and they would these lines that are going into the garage so they would the garages would be on the first floor, second floor would be the kitchen and the bathrooms. Third floor would be the two bedrooms and the fourth floor would be one master bedroom and we are in a multifamily and so we could have six units but we're proposing six story but we're proposing for a four storey and let's see the there is a big open area between the two like seventy five feet open area the moment the existing eight are has an existing structure garage at the moment that will be allowed to replace by these three row houses three family houses, three bedrooms each and as I said earlier, the questions that we render your easement and also go back to the community in which I have hopefully resolved us and sent a woman thank you. The questions from the board very quickly, have you made any changes to the plans since the last time you presented I'm sorry, can you repeat that question? Yes. Have you made any changes to the proposal since the last time that you presented to this to the board? I know I have not other than other than registering easement as requested you thank you and no questions from the board chair. Allright to hear from the planning department on their recommendation.  Mr. Hampton are you available.  Yes Madam Chair. Thank you everyone. Johanson's the apostle leaning forward. This is kind of a unique case as I'm sure Mr. Stembridge is probably inquiring why that we are actually in support of the residential development behind . However this is one of those situations where you know I don't know the chicken the egg about the increase of pavement impervious surface to get their we're in support of this residential use but somehow there has to be some sort of work done on getting to the rear of that so that it is not completely paved over and we need to increase the use of open space on this. So I do understand what you had before. You are two separate votes one to deny the extension of the access drive and the parking for I believe a green building but we are in support of the development of the three family behind so I'm not really sure if that's going to clear up things for you or make them even more money.  >> And Mr. Hamdan, do you see the opportunity to just at the time of the I think this might come under one of those things how much authority do you want to give the planning department in terms of design review? You know, is it you know, removing the impervious space, increasing open space?  I believe they might have insufficient off street parking already.  Is that something that we look at this may come back to the board with a separate completely different design altogether.  So I'm not this kind of reminded me of London Street from a couple of weeks ago where you know, if we real heavy handed on design review on this, how much of this is really going to change and now is it a complete a completely different project? So if you would like if the board seems fit to approve this project with a design review with substantial with no telling us giving us direction on substantial design on open space, we'll give it a go and do the best we can. But I don't know what if anything happened with the the actual design. >> OK, thank you but I mean I do want to recognize that the applicant did do what the previous board asked him to do regarding the easement.  So I'll just remind folks of that questions questions can I respond to there will not be an increase of in asphalt there is an existing asphalt at the moment that is the one that we're going to be using.  They will not be any destruction of a green space by building what it is already taking care of is getting rid of a garage that's there and then build a building on top of it and so there's no space that we will be getting rid of . Thank you. So that's helpful.  Thank you. Any other questions from the board?  May we have public testimony that I'm sure members of the board continue on with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services inside the mayor's office to defer to the judgment this board previously owned house to bother spending for this.  There had been some concerns regarding some residents felt the budget was too small for another building as well as weather emergency services to be able to access that part of the property if issues arose something that must continue to work with some neighbors.  But I wouldn't want to have access to the Afghan several times with the Mount Pleasant Neighborhood Association which they repeatedly kept asking to come back and provide more information which he did ultimately does not sound like the civic in the Afghan were able to see eye to eye. So I don't believe the stance was taken in support but with that information on the front of the board at this time thank you, Piers. I have no second I know where you stand at the moment. Thank you.  Thank you. And I do want to note that we do have letters of support on file. Any other questions from the board?  We have a motion OK, I'm going to try Mom said I would like to make a motion of approval.  We have you from the planning department to close in the basement areas and improving the parking configuration and I'm hoping to see if any more board member wants to add provice.  I think they can explain that was existing pavement's. So that's what any other additions is there a second a second Mr. Stembridge? Yes. Mr. Alonso. Yes. Mr. Myname.  Yes, we will.  Yes. Mr. Collins.  Yes. Chair votes yes. The motion carries Gilbarco.  Thank you very much inEducation . We will move on to the way one six zero one nine eight with the address of one forty two Geary Street. If the applicant and or their representative present there please explain to the board if we see the applicant.  Oh yeah I see yeah yeah.  Sorry unmuted Matt OK soundtrack this is Matt Hennesey for the developer and I am yep we can hear you beautiful.  Thank you Madam Chair and members of the board and for visuals OK here's our here's our presentation from last time but I did submit a revised plan for one forty two eri the subject property the one change that we made from our last appearance the wrap up Amico asked us to revise the parking spot which we have done so it's going to be in this in this plan said it's in I screen sherbets and the it's in the revised plan that we did for direction for BTD so that's the only change this drawing will not show it again. I did submit a revised plan a revised plan you wanted to speak from this to tell us what you did differently your so this is a plot plan for one point two it does not show the parking spot that's on our architectural site and if you can envision it it's along the southerly property line coming in off of every street where we had it originally was right off the street and BTD asked us to set that back. So now the parking spot is set back appropriately and we have an email consent from both of you go there it is beautiful. OK, great that architect the architectural side plan some of the members can see you can see you are coming in off Erie now every driveway spot and that is the only change in order to accomplish this we did move to the footprint building slightly to the north which made our northerly set back a little bit smaller by about a foot so that those are the changes.  I think questions from the board.  Yes, I got one more question why that question questions really.  I know what every street every street is kind of like a tight place park I'm pretty sure it's probably no often the park and one of them site but I'm almost sure it's like a playground across the street. Is it any way possible that just trying to help maintain a place for the kids to play the parking lot I mean I'm sorry the playground yes. The area is the area Arlington Playground tremendous community victory making that happen. Codman Square and DC was deeply involved or not but anyway yeah, we're well aware of it. We will be going to the Parks Commission for Design Review know parks parks Authority a commitment to maintenances that would be a new idea.  Remember member land and we have to take consideration.  There's a picture that was just me I forget the it that was just me throwing it out there.  Yeah. I mean we are in very close touch with the main civic group which is Gary Ellington Brinkley Association. We have written approval from them. We did make a commitment to them to repair or replace a tool shed at another site not at the top a lot but another open space site nearby. So we made that commitment to that group that it's the first time anybody suggested any maintenance of the title on Park so we'd have to think about that one. OK, thank you.  We just we need to analyze you know, as I mean what's the cost because the cost ultimately since this is home ownership,  the costs would be borne by the nine lower income or moderate income homeowners and will not be once you sell the United States will not be an owner.  Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from the here? None can win public testimony.  >> Yes, Madam Chair, members of the board Codrington with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's office referred to the Judkins board.  This went through an extensive MSH community process involving the applicant working with the Civic Association in this case the Erie, Arlington and Brinsley Partnership Association which is supportive of this proposal. We're aware of any concerns at this time and has mentioned many in the community are excited for these affordable units being added.  >> Thank you. Good morning, Madam Chairman. Members Board again my name is with the Office of City Council Bryan Monroe.  We would like to the council would like to go on record and being in support of this project given the process of support from the area of civic association. Thank mentor.  I have no racings at the moment . Thank you. Any of the questions from the board ma'am?  Motion I would like to make a motion to follow we with a view from the planning department then the second back in the stembridge. Yes Mr Rentier. Yes Mr Item yes. As we yes Mr Collins. Yes Chairman.  Yes the motion carries thank you.  And next we have a very compelling case the first being the case VOA one four six six five one six daddy us all to fifty on Street.  Along with that we have a case VOA one six zero five nine five eight with the address of two fifty are on Street and find that we have case VOA one four six five two zero also with the address of two fifty ah Port St is the applicant and the representative of the Prince of Wales and the boy.  Good morning Madam Chairman and members of board. My name is David and I am the owner of Two Fifty Board Street . I was asked to this is not the right this is the old site plan and I was asked to resubmit a side plan showing that I could go back up please and one more go.  This is the inside plan showing parking for the first building as well as the fire truck access and there is also I should know an additional parking space within the structure we are proposing to tear down an existing two car garage and replace it with a two storey 82 for lack of a better description. Small town on the property in the back we are in violation of a number of issues with regard to setbacks and what a lot phonic etc. and we are making some proposals to deal with those issues.  We need to provide for a ten foot requirements access which we will do little simply requires cutting trees and removing shrubs. We have relocated we could sprawl to the first floor plan please.  We have included a second means of egress and move the primary entrance to the building so that it faces the street additionally we are willing to sprinkle the building because it's it is about 250. It's just under two hundred forty foot guideline but apparently sprinklers would be required by building department to approve this.  Other than that I think that's addresses all the issues that were raised.  Thank you. Are there questions from the board here?  None for the testimony, Madam Chair, members of the board and with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor is obligated to refer to the judgment this board is going through L.A. community process involving both parties meetings as well as meeting with the Jamaica Hills Association and the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council Bolsheviks voted to support this proposal.  There's also letters of support that were generated from outreach at the L.A. Times. Well, without referring to the board at this time.  Thank you. Thank you.  Thank you. Have a Hollywood arrangement I you got my start doing that on you. Byberry.  I am going to testimony on this proposal. Try to I this is David Rose from sixty three Main Street. Can I be heard yet I so I'm I'm around the corner from the proposed development my property overlooks the proposed development.  I take issue with the scope of the development I don't have a problem with garages being converted into in last week's where there's a need in fact our other neighbor has done just that. They converted a garage into an was we without expanding the footprint without going upwards. I do take issue with tearing down a garage and shoehorning a single family home into the proposed space.  So it's really an issue of scope and I submitted a letter or email on June.  I just wanted to make sure that that was entered into the record.  Thank you. And we have no additional raised hands at the moment with the applicant like to respond to that? Sure. Can you switch to the macing study that I submitted was overcontrolling screen which document you know, just small and there should be a photograph with a Elson's study . Thank you once again Scorsone,  you score artist.  OK, so the when you see the one is the existing garage and what is not whited out is obviously the increase Masterfoods up for the property know that the existing garage is was built directly on the dirt. It does have a cement floor but the structural members of the building are simply put on wood sleepers.  A restaurant on the ground structure must be about fifty years old and is rotting. The current roof is sagging and it's no longer functional. It's really not very safe and we certainly couldn't renovate the new structures only seven feet taller than the existing structure that exists just in structures 14 feet and the new one measures twenty feet three inches. I believe overall we are not changing the footprint we're keeping the the nature of the architecture actually mimics my house and the same color and I don't believe that the you know, I think it's a far more attractive building and certainly more functional.  I think the question other questions from the board hearing no emotion not coming can so go ahead, Katie. I'm going to perform my second stembridge. Yes, Mr. Valencia.  Yes, Mr. Lamb. Yes, ma'am. Miss me?  Well, yes, Mr. Collins. It's shareholders. Yes. The motion carries.  Thank you. Thank you. And it looks like our next hearings are at one o'clock so I will see you then.  --------- ##VIDEO ID:qL2DiwsAZtA## Morning, OK, Mr. Collins, good morning, Madam Chair.  President sorry Caroline, am I waiting for Mr. Brassard today? Should not just be I'm checking on that right now for you. OK, thank you.  Looks like she may not be presenting so yeah. >> Madam Chair I don't think so because Stephanie asked me to fill in as architecture director.  Thank you. So we are a six member board. With that I will turn it over to Mr. Stembridge.  Thank you about we'll begin with the approval of hearing minutes.  These are for August 13th,  August 22nd and August twenty seven of this year men we have a motion I make the motion to approve the minutes that was read now the second OK Mr. Stembridge.  Yes, Mr. President. Yes, Mr. Lamb. Yes. As we as Mr. Collins. Yes, Chairman. Yes. The motion carries that you will move on to extensional schedule for the third year of there and we all will need extensions to the record and then we will take a couple more if anyone has any questions will know what I catch.  First we have case VOA nine nine to one zero nine put the address of twenty four and with that we have case VOA nine two zero five the address of eight and screen and five we have to be away one three five two three eight six to address or seventy two Clybourne Park.  Any questions from the board?  May I have a motion to grant the extensions as requested make a motion to grant the extensions of have a second second Mr. Stafford. Yes Mr. Valencia yes Mr. Langham yes miss. We will yes Mr. Collins. Yes chair votes yes. The motion carries next we have a ground rule that the conservation of the KVOA one six to seven to seven four with the address of three forty Newbury Street be allocated.  Do they represent a present they please by case yes. Good morning Madam Chair. Members of the board attorney langoustine from a quarter million twenty eight State Street sweep to awesomeness on behalf of the appellant with me this morning on the call as well I would been on behalf of ownership in Richard Latini who is the project engineer. This is an appeal seeking relief in connection installation of new ground water recharge system at the property located at three forty four Newbury Street. The appellant has submitted the required letter and the Boston Water and Sewer letter indicating that the new recharge system will have no negative impact upon groundwater levels in the area and is compliant with the city's requirements. And we're certainly happy to answer any questions that you all might have this morning. Thank you.  There's something going on. Yes Madam Chair. Good morning to members of the Boyd Christian Simonelli Bossism Groundwater Trust and we have both key letters from the applicant. Thank you. Any any questions from the board hearing?  None. May I have a motion?  I make a motion for the second time.  Mr. Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Dencio.  Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes. Me well yes. Mr. Collins.  Yes, Chairman. Yes motion carries thank you. Move on to the hearings scheduled for nine thirty AM stock. We have two companion cases case bohane once zero zero zero seven six what's the address of one Adams Street along that we have case the wait one six zero zero zero eight seven also with the address one out of St. is out to get the representative of the police in the case of more cases the book yes my name is Timothy Sharam the architect for the project What Adams Street is a four story single family structure. What we'd like to do is put a roof deck on the violations are the buildings currently forty nine feet and change high so we have a height violation by adding to that with the roof deck and we're also within the Charlestown restricted rouge district. So that's why we need zoning relief.  The building code issue comes from because it's a four story structure we're not allowed to put a hatch in but the zoning won't allow Pentel.  So that's an automatic building code issue that always comes up on these.  We've had like we have lately attended neighborhood meeting. We've been working with the neighbors all the way through the project and I believe we have six letters of support and with that I'll leave you to your questions. Thank you.  Any questions from the board?  There is no public testimony, Madam Chair members of the board ciggie Johnson Office of Neighborhood Services. This proponent has completed community process. Our office hosted an important meeting on the 18th June that which no concerns were raised. Our office has additionally received a letter of support signed by eight Buttars. With that background we defer to the judgment of the board. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair. I have known since September well that may I have a motion Madam Chair? I'll make a motion of approval with the proviso that the plans be submitted for a design review with attention to ensuring that mortgage check is not visible from the public right away and including a reduction in overall reinfect size and further step back from the edge if necessary. Is there a Second Circuit Mr. Stembridge?  Yes, Mr. Valencia.  Yes, Mr. Langham. Yes we yes. Mr. Collins. Yes Schierholz yes the motion carries good luck. Thank you everybody.  Next we have to more compelling cases first this case be a one six zero for two to carry with the address thirteen our North Avenue along with that case Boet one six zero four two two four but the address of thirteen our North Avenue if the applicant or their representative were president would they please explain to the what the warning them chair members of the board. My name Mike Jarvis. I'm the architect and representatives of the owner. Some homes that the branch the hands another garage conversion ,a detached garage converted into an edu. So I brought some of these for the board in the past and it's still met and still the only neighborhood that allows for these types of conversions as of right. This one's in Roxbury and therefore we need to go to the zoning process. So this meeting you will be a studio sized living space if it's at the end in the driveway like a small kitchen bathroom and open living and sleeping areas, the garage footprint will remain the same size the next year dear that we're adding on to the back that will allow access to the roof as well as a closet for that thirteen D sprinkler system to meet the Boston Fire Codes Code Compliance for Detasseling to use that they released back in December.  The utilities will be all directly connected to the existing house. There will be no work done under the sidewalk or street.  There's no new utilities being connected up to the streets. It will be designed to behave as a detached you the proposed project has gone through the community process the owner has received six letters of support which was sent over to the owner's rep and so buyers and neighbors are in support of the project as they've gone through the process. Is there any questions or comments? Thank you. Are there questions from the board hearing public testimony? Yes, Madam Chair, members of the board 400 women with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's defer to the judge from this board as you heard from adequate representation.  There were six letters of support sent in from a button our office had conducting the Buttars meeting on June twenty six.  There were no questions or concerns raised about meeting from what I understand, the outcome then went on to meet with the Dudley Square Neighborhood Initiative on July 25th. That Civic Association had no objections to the proposal are unaware of any concerns at that time and without threat to the board. Thank you. Thank you so much. I have no reason at the moment. OK with that may I have a motion? I make a motion for with the proviso that that is not within court.  Granted no relief is a second Mr Stembridge. Yeah Mr Mr. here yes Mr Bingham. Yes yes we will. Yes Mr Collins yes chair votes yes motion carries with no biggie everybody next we have a case vote one five five three two nine eight oh the address of twenty seven w Street If the African can represent the President then please explain to both Cameron's on I just made the panelists that might take them a second time and they can bring some words and I just took a little bit to activate my screen. Cameron Merrill one hundred state Street Boston Massachusetts on behalf of the applicant I'll try to keep my remarks brief. Also president is Mark Leibler who can discuss the plans with you. This is the building that was allowed to be converted to a six unit building maybe two or three years ago since that time due to the unique nature of that kind of north rectangular unit there in yellow, they thought that that could better be similar it into two different units, one on each floor as opposed to awkwardly shaped one unit that spanned both floors in conjunction with the city's is to add housing. We thought this was a great opportunity to do so. It will be one studio and one one bedroom resulting in seven units total. There's no exterior wiring for this is all interior so those other violations which you see on the denial letter actually span from the original project of which the relief was already granted. They were just issued because there is an alteration to the structure. The only active if you will violation is that we are going from six to seven units. There was a public protest here about there was support with the proviso that if the unit is rented the rent not exceed 80 percent am I which we will agree to as a proviso and other than that I will leave it to the board for questions if you have any. Thank you. Any questions from the board? I have a question. Did you review the CPA recommend or the planning department recommendation for this? I was not made aware that there was a written recommendation so it looks like there are some inconsistencies in the plan. So if you go back to the floor plan the proposed it looks like quite a few areas are designated as Unit two. Those three kind of slate blue color that's all Unit two but they actually recommended a deferral so that the plans could be reviewed adequately. Mr Hampton, I see your hands raised or is that Mr Hampton? Yes, it is. Thank you Madam Chairman of the Board Jeff Hampton City Boston Planning Department.  You're exactly right which we well we found to be pretty confusing and we know that there's a basement area and there were no elevations sent in to show us any sort of ceiling heights with that basement even though it may be existing.  We still didn't see any so we would just rest assured a deferral so that we can get clarify any plans for this?  No problem. OK, I Caroline, do we have any dates yet? We could do October eight.  Is that sufficient from the Mr. Merrill and Mr. Hampton. Yes.  Well that's how I think about you OK with that may I have a motion motion to refer to October 2nd Mr. Stembridge? Yes, Mr. Landsea.  Yes. Mr. Lynham. Yes, ma'am. Mizue Well yes Mr. Collins.  Yes, yes. Motion carries. See you then next case VOA one five nine seven five what's the address of three thirty three thirty six Washington Street is the outlook and what they represent. I would present the one to the board. >> Yes good morning.  Thank you. My name is Amy Goodman. I'm here representing Steve Sullivan the owner of Montana LLC the is three three six Washington Street.  He was the former Exodus Bagel's in Jamaica Plain on the corner of Glen Road and Washington Street. The plan is to restore the existing store front and build eight residential units above and around three units in the rear will be townhouse style or sale condominiums and the five smaller units in the front will be rental units.  We went to a fairly extensive community process Jamaica Plain multiple meetings held with ONIS.  We got a strong letter of support from the Neighborhood Association as well as a unanimous vote of support from the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council Zoning Committee.  Overall I think it was a pretty well attended and well received community process and project.  You know, I'm happy to answer any questions for the board at this time. Thank you.  Thank you. Questions from the board here in public testimony.  Yes, Madam Chair, members of the board cornerman with the mayor's office of Neighborhood Services this time the mayor's office to defer to the judge on board. As you heard from the applicants, there were several excuse me two bodies meetings that were held by onis with some members of the public vocalizing their support in other issues having questions regarding the number of parking spaces, the construction time frame as well as potential shadows the applicant was able to answer those questions. They went on to meet with the local neighborhood association then also secure support from the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Council with out defer to the board at this time. Thank you. Thank you Chairman.  I have no way stands at the moment.  Any other questions from the board with that? May I have a motion?  I'd like to make a motion for approval. Rebibbia we need to find the second section Mr. Stembridge Mr. Lutz here. Yes, Mr. Langham. Yes. As we well yes.  Mr. Collins. Yes. Chairman. Yes. The motion carries good luck. Thank you.  Next we advocate VOA one forty two to four five of the addresses of fifty to fifty two thousand three applications and only representing twenty twenty one OK as soon as I'm going to make you a panelist you want second can you please accept when you see the panelists designation appear on the screen and then you can you yourself start radio. Hello.  Yes sir we can hear you and see how good my name is are you sure you like I'm the owner of the apartment building at Fifty Thousand Street and it's an apartment building at fifty two down the street. Black smoke a cigaret before you today to request permission to add a three bedroom at a backyard level basement space at 50000 Street and a three bedroom unit apartment space at the background level a basement space I should say at fifty two down the street as required by the city. We had contact with the five brothers approximately eighty five of them with no opposition and we've also met with the community organization Babbette Past and try to neighborhood association community communicate to them of our ambitions and uncertainty by the board. We received the letter of what we should have you should have your package there.  So I'm here to request permission to continue working with the department to bring this project to fruition.  This is my presentation and any questions.  Thank you. Just to confirm that the work is all interior.  Yes ma'am. No actually I need to know that the basement level will be expanded by Corbitt.  Any questions?  No hearing.  No problem testimony? Yes. Madam Chair. Members of the board continuing with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services at this time the mayor's office defer to the judgment this board on hosting the Buttars meeting on May six. I lightly attended the I was able to address questions from one resident regarding if this would be for affordable housing. We did later receive one letter in opposition just expressing concerns about the proposed density and the potential competition for parking on the street. And as you heard from the applicant, they reached out and contact the met with the Gas Trotter Neighborhood Association with that will defer to the board at this time. Thank you.  Thank you, Senator. I have known since thank you for that madam.  I make a motion to approve no building code really.  We have a second check.  Mr. Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Wannsee.  Yes. Mr. Langham. Yes. we well yes. Mr. Collins. Yes, Chairman. Yes. The motion carries good luck. Thank you very much that we have case VOA one six three two three one seven with the address of sixty one London Street.  If the applicant to represent President the case I am hello Madam Chairman and this is Mike Ross, attorney for the applicant. We're going requested to file today I received this relatively recently and we believe that we can make some minor modifications to the plan to reduce a couple up about one or two violations. So we'd like to do that, come back to the board.  OK, count how many of the dates we could do October eight I worked at I said is not true. OK, may I have a motion? I make a motion to defer to Autobody eight.  Yeah.  Mr. Mansio. Yes, Mr. Raynham.  >> Yes, we s Mr. Collins yes.  Yes. Motion carries see you then. A lot next we have case your way one five seven six zero zero one five seven five six zero zero to address two fourteen well street if the applicant can only represent what then please explain the case. Thank you Mr. Stembridge. Good morning Madam Chairman. Members of the board just burns on behalf of the applicant. We're actually going to request a deferral today.  We are currently speaking with the mayor's Office of Housing regarding the affordability component of this project as it is a yard sale property. We just need a little bit more time to get things wrapped up with them before we can bring this to the board of Caroline, we can do October eight.  We are OK a lot of coverage. Caroline emotion motions,  geological.  Why don't you go on Friday, October eight now the second Saturday Mr. Stembridge. Yes, Mr. Valencia. Yes, Mr. Litum.  Yes. As we well yes. Mr. Collins yes votes motion carries and thank you very much . Next we have a case going one five eight nine eight one nine with your address is one thirty three to one thirty five. Winfield's three if the applicant and handle a new representative of President then please explain the case. Yes, thank you. This Dagmar the applicant and joined with me on Spassky the architect. This is a three four property unit that is needed as a two minute building.  The proposal is to convert started into the third unit with that we would put a fire escape off the back of the building for the second unit that would be a one bedroom, one bathroom unit with the goal of adding additional rental property in the Dorchester area. We met with the Abiders as well as the neighborhood on this property and so we're asking for zoning release on this. Thank thank you are the questions from the board hearing testimony? Yes, Madam Chair, members of the board then with the mayor's Office of Neighborhood Services inside the marriage ask to defer to the judgment this board when hosting the Buttars meeting on May 29th on a fundraising attendance just had some questions regarding potential length of the construction period as well as the resident requesting to work with the applicant in person. As you heard Vatican representation, they went on to meet with the west of Washington Neighborhood Association in July unaware of any further concerns this time of doubt refer to the board. Thank you.  >> Good morning. Good morning, Madam Chair. Members of the board millions of back in with the Office of City Councilor Brian Warrell District four and in regards to one thirty three thirty five with the old St. have received letters of support from the west of Washington also to go on record the council will vote to go on record in support of this project. Thank you.  Thank you for raising that.  May I have a motion room now the second segment Mr. Stembridge.  Yes, Mr. Valencia.  Yes, Mr. Chairman. Yes, As we well yes. Mr. Collins. Yes chair votes yes.  The motion carries and it looks like we are on break until the 11:00 appearance while I do run a tight ship to you that.